framingham police department selectmen presentation november 15, 2005
TRANSCRIPT
Framingham Police Department
Selectmen Presentation
November 15, 2005
Presentation Overview
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison– Historical– Community Comparison Study
FY05 Departmental Accomplishments
FY06 Departmental Goals
Downtown Issues & Challenges
Miscellaneous Issues
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Historical
1970 Police Management Consultants Report– Conducted as directed by Special Town Meeting
April 14, 1970– Article 22 of Town Warrant – Commission established to included
Three Selectman Police Chief Two Town Meeting Members (selected by Town Moderator) Member of Framingham Police Association
– Background: Commission reviewed over twenty applications submitted to conduct study and selected Robert Sheehan and Associates (Police Management Consultants)
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Historical
1970
Sheehan & Assoc.
2004
FPD CAD
%
Change
Population 63,233 65,598 +3.7
Officers 98 118* +20.4
Crossing Guards 54 23 -57.4
Part I Offenses 1,452 1,875 +29.1
Part II Offenses 1,815 1,438 -20.7
Calls-for-Service 10,920 38,683 +254.2
Arrests 1,119 1,690 +51.0
Accidents 1,578 1,861 +17.9
*Authorized strength does not include vacant positions or officers on military deployment, FMLA, or 111F (22)
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Historical
32,471 33,005
34,95236,007
37,93438,683
35,276
28,000
30,000
32,000
34,000
36,000
38,000
40,000
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Town-Wide CAD Calls
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Historical
Miscellaneous – Population
Population total for 2004 does not include emerging immigrant population, homeless, educational, and commerce related numbers
Sheehan Staffing Recommendations– Important to note: “On the basis of information available from the
Metropolitan Area Planning Council, it would be the consultants opinion that the department will expand manpower wise by at least 25% between now and 1990”
1970 = 98 Officers – 25% increase would mean a 1990 staffing level of 123 sworn officers
We currently have 118 sworn personnel This is 5 officers less than recommended for 1990
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Community Comparison
2004 Census Estimated Population
56,188
65,598
59,232
54,202
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
Brookline Framingham Waltham Weymouth
Town
Po
pu
lati
on
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Community Comparison
Land Area
6.79
25.12
12.7
17.01
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Brookline Framingham Waltham Weymouth
Town
Sq
uare
Miles
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Community Comparison
Public Road Miles
111.33
241.83
159.79
176.4
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Brookline Framingham Waltham Weymouth
Town
Miles
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Community Comparison
Sworn Officers / Authorized Strength
130
109
149
97
140
118
150
103
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Brookline Framingham Waltham Weymouth
Town
Off
icer
s
Sworn Officers
Authorized Strength
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Community Comparison
Civilian Employees
31
11
37
14
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Brookline Framingham Waltham Weymouth
Town
Em
plo
yees
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Community Comparison
2004 Police Budget
12,437,511
8,847,433
11,453,754
9,466,000
0
2,000,000
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
10,000,000
12,000,000
14,000,000
Brookline Framingham Waltham Weymouth
Town
Bu
dg
et
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Community Comparison
Note: Part I offenses include murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, motor vehicle theft, and arson
2004 Part I Offenses
1,307
1,875
971
1,574
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
Brookline Framingham Waltham Weymouth
Town
Part
I O
ffen
ses
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Community Comparison
Note: Part II offenses include numerous offenses including simple assault, fraud, embezzlement, receiving stolen property, vandalism, weapons possession, vice crimes, drug offenses, gambling, DUI, and various other offenses.
2004 Part II Offenses
1,438
1177
981
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
Brookline Framingham Waltham Weymouth
Town
Part
II O
ffen
ses
Not Available
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Community Comparison
Note: It is unknown to what level towns responding to the Staffing Survey cleaned their CAD data. Framingham cleaned all CAD entries not requiring a police response from data utilized for this report.
2004 CAD Calls
31,777
38,683 38,632
26,835
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
Brookline Framingham Waltham Weymouth
Town
CA
D C
alls
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Community Comparison
CAD Calls per Officer
244
355
259
277
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Brookline Framingham Waltham Weymouth
Town
CA
D C
alls
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Community Comparison
Note: In 2004, the FBI reported the national average is 3.5 officers per 1,000 residents
Officers per 1000 Residents
2.31
1.66
2.51
1.78
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Brookline Framingham Waltham Weymouth
Town
Off
icers
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Community Comparison
Officers per Square Mile
19.1
4.33
11.73
5.7
0
5
10
15
20
25
Brookline Framingham Waltham Weymouth
Town
Off
icers
Framingham Police Staffing Comparison: Community Comparison
Officers per 10 Road Miles
11.67
4.5
9.32
5.49
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Brookline Framingham Waltham Weymouth
Town
Off
icers
FY05 Departmental Accomplishments
Enforcement– Long-term gun and gang investigations in partnership with
MSP, ATF, and DEA– Weed & Seed application and training– Monthly MSP Fugitive Warrant Team deployments– Motor Scooter By-law– Streets Crime Unit development / implementation – Code Enforcement Task Force participation – Liquor license enforcement and mandatory training– Sex Offender Registry: monitoring and enforcement
FY05 Departmental Accomplishments
Accountability– Attained Accreditation – Customer surveys: Post-contact and Downtown Merchant Survey– Implemented electronic evidence intake and tracking system– Conducted evidence room audit– Merged Detail and Evidence Officer positions– Alarm By-law enforcement– 111F wording change– Enhanced Internal Affairs / Professional Standards process – Conducted in-service training on town’s Customer Service Policy– Updated Department’s Pursuit and Use of Force Policies– Conducted phone, daily log, and officer report audits
FY05 Departmental Accomplishments
Original Survey Property Damaged = 42% Business Broken Into = 39% Being Assaulted = 36% Being Robbed = 36% Property Stolen = 33%
Follow-up Property Damaged = 40%
– Pre/post = 40%
Business Broken Into = 38%– Pre/post = 35%
Being Assaulted = 41%– Pre/post = 35%
Being Robbed = 43%– Pre/post = 35%
Property Stolen = 38%– Pre/post = 30%
Customer surveys: Downtown Merchant Survey
Survey Notes:
Original Survey: N=135
Follow-up Survey: N=121
Pre/post: N=20
Responses of Fearful or Very Fearful to the following CRIMES:
FY05 Departmental Accomplishments
Original Survey – Loud Music from Street =
62%– Undesirables – Trespassers
- Loiterers = 41% – Intoxicated People = 35%– Panhandlers = 34%– Gangs = 31%
Follow-up– Loud Music from Street =
54% Pre/post = 45%
– Undesirables – Trespassers - Loiterers = 42%
Pre/post = 35%– Intoxicated People = 49%
Pre/post = 45%– Panhandlers = 43%
Pre/post = 35%– Gangs = 45%
Pre/post = 35%
Customer surveys: Downtown Merchant SurveyResponses of Once a Week or More than Once a Week to the following QUALITY of LIFE ISSUES:
FY05 Departmental Accomplishments
Customer surveys: Downtown Merchant Survey
Has respondent noticed an increased police presence in the downtown area?
– Yes = 41% Pre/post = 50%
How much safer does the respondent feel knowing that the police have made the downtown area one of their top priorities?
– A lot safer + Somewhat safer + Safer = 84% Pre/post = 100%
Is the respondent more likely to call the police to report problems today as compared to before the police made it a priority?
– Yes = 47% Pre/post = 63%
FY05 Departmental Accomplishments
Homeland Security– Conducted extra patrols in area of rail station and
marshalling yard– Provided extra rail station security during Democratic
National Convention This initiative was coordinated with the Executive Office of
Public Safety and the MBTA– The department received reimbursement for their participation
– Conducted comprehensive vulnerability study of critical assets
– Initiated partnership with local corporate security directors
FY05 Departmental Accomplishments
Grant Funding– Replaced 38 obsolete portable radios– Obtained commercial vehicle scales– New motorcycles– Unmarked cruiser– Computers– Surveillance equipment– Training– Tactical equipment for Special Operations Unit
FY05 Departmental Accomplishments
Traffic Enforcement– Increased Commercial Motor Vehicle enforcement– Parking enforcement
Specifically, sidewalk and snow emergency violations– Conducted site-inspections of RMV designated safety &
emissions sticker providers– Conducted random inspections of wreckers / tow trucks– Conducted area-specific emissions/safety sticker
enforcement– Conducted training pursuant to enforcement options
available to deal with idling motor vehicles
FY05 Departmental Accomplishments
Revenues
FY01 FY03 FY05
Traffic / Court
194,847.58 356,615.29 222,363.27
Parking 229,417.95 281,366.26 299,056.00
False Alarms 14,704.00 11,700.00 129,950.00
Detail Surcharge
123,117.53 103,572.29 102,332.35
Total 562,087.06 753,253.84 753,701.62
Percentage Change +34% +6%
FY06 Goals
Goal One: Proactively address the issue of “Racial Profiling”1. Fully comply with EOPS mandates and recommended best practices
regarding data collection and analysis2. Develop a customized database encompassing recommended
variables and dimensions to capture profiling related data3. Generate reports using the database to scientifically determine if
racial profiling is occurring, and if so, identify officers who appear to be improperly considering a motorists race
4. Participate in a Northeastern University Study developing state-of-the-art profiling data collection and management methodologies
- Framingham Police are one of only six departments in Massachusetts selected to participate in this pilot study
FY06 Goals
Goal Two: Concentrate police resources on quality of life issues detracting from the Downtown Business District
1. Assign Traffic Enforcement Unit to focus on specific violations which create a hazardous situation in downtown
2. Maintain strict parking enforcement in the downtown business district3. Apply for Weed & Seed grant funds to enhance police efforts with
revitalization of downtown4. Work with the Town Manager and SMOC to develop strategies to mitigate the
negative impact of the Wet Shelter in our community5. Maintain and enhance pro-active police presence in the downtown area by
deploying Street Crime Unit personnel, foot patrol officers, and bicycle patrol officers to target quality of life issues
6. Continue to actively work with Code Enforcement Task Force personnel to identify and investigate violations occurring downtown
7. Establish work group to develop and evaluate a strategy to facilitate and control the spontaneous 2006 World Cup celebrations expected in the downtown area during the June 2006 tournament
FY06 Goals
Goal Three: Implement the “Data Driven Management Model (Compstat)” concept at the shift level
1. Provide shift commanders and line supervisors with data regarding the personnel under their command so they can positively recognize productive employees and address deficient personnel
2. Provide training to shift commanders and line supervisors so that they can independently generate statistical reports
3. Insure that supervisors routinely utilize crime and calls for service statistics to deploy personnel in the most cost effective and efficient manner
4. Require commanders to perform formal and documented line inspections to ensure compliance with Accreditation standards
5. Require commanders to address issues such as attendance, patterned absences, and productivity on an on-going basis
6. Use graphical comparisons of productivity by shift, division, and officer as a motivation tool
FY06 Goals
Goal Four: Police, Fire, and DPW Joint Goal1. Assure all three departments are in compliance with the NIMS
mandate, assuring that all employees are trained.2. Review the two way radio capabilities the town has and
devise a written protocol to allow cross-frequency communication. One consideration should be a distinct call number for each radio in town.
3. Establish a written protocol for communication to be implemented at the scene of any major cross-department incident.
4. Work to prepare a full scale disaster drill in 2006
Downtown Issues and Challenges
Background / Crime Rate– UCR National Violent Crime Rate is:
– 475.0 per 100,000 inhabitants UCR New England Violent Crime rate is:
– 238.5 per 100,000 inhabitants Massachusetts Violent Crime Rate is:
– 263.1 per 100,000 inhabitants Framingham Violent Crime Rate is:
– 263.1 per 100,000 inhabitants
Note: UCR data presented was obtained from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and represents the most current statistics available (Year 2003)
Violent crime is defined as murder, non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault
Downtown Issues and Challenges
Downtown Arrests
1,846
842
1,894
758
1,546
580
1,690
732
1,473
646
0200400600800
1,0001,2001,4001,6001,8002,000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
Town WideDowntown
Downtown Issues and Challenges
Homeless Arrests
251 260
137
272
236
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
Downtown Issues and Challenges
Wet Shelter– Individuals providing Wet Shelter address at
time of their booking / arrest
15
43 40
76
105
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
Downtown Issues and Challenges
Wet Shelter (continued)– Wet Shelter visit conducted August 16, 2005
21 registered guest on night of visit 17 Males / 4 Females
– 7 were from the Framingham area– 14 were from outside the Framingham area– 16 had criminal records
Crimes on these records included armed robbery, narcotic violations, assault and battery on a police officer, breaking and entering, prostitution, larceny, rape, indecent assault and battery, OUI, and various weapons charges
Downtown Issues and Challenges
Wet Shelter (continued)– Wet Shelter visit conducted October 29, 2005
21 registered guest on night of visit 16 Males / 5 Females
– 6 were from the Framingham area– 15 were from outside the Framingham area– 19 individuals had criminal records
Crimes on these records included armed robbery, narcotic violations, assault and battery on a police officer, breaking and entering, prostitution, larceny, rape, indecent assault and battery, OUI, and various weapons charges
Downtown Issues and Challenges
Wet Shelter (continued)– October 2005 Wet Shelter Visits
Throughout the month, information was obtained on 99 different individuals
– 33 were from the Framingham area– 52 were from outside the Framingham area– 14 individuals were unable to provide reliable identifying
information– Of the 85 providing reliable information:
40 individuals had extensive criminal records (over 20 entries on their records)
12 had active criminal warrants
Downtown Issues and Challenges
Wet Shelter (continued)– Miscellaneous Wet Shelter information
During the two specific site visits mentioned in previous slides, only 2 individuals were at the shelter during both visits
Between January 1, 2005 and August 15, 2005– 15% of the individuals placed in protective custody / arrest in
Framingham reported the Wet Shelter as their address (N = 173)
57 individuals were responsible for these 173 PC’s / Arrests 55 of these individuals had a previous criminal record at the
time they were taken into custody
Downtown Issues and Concerns
Wet Shelter (continued)– Response to Wet Shelter issues
Prevention– Working with SMOC:
Development shelter in-take screening protocol Warrant checks on prospective shelter service users Enhanced case management of referred clients
Intervention– Weed and Seed– Working with court, probation, parole, District Attorney’s Office, Middlesex Sheriffs
Department, and Violence Prevention Roundtable to develop strategies to address individuals identified as negatively impacting the over-all quality of life in the downtown area. Targeted individuals will include repeat offenders and those involved in gangs, guns, and drugs.
Enforcement– Street Crime Unit– Zero-tolerance quality of life enforcement– Priority prosecution
Miscellaneous Issues
Code enforcement
World Cup issues and concerns
Staffing and funding– By 2008, optimum staffing level to be on parity with similar
communities– Overtime budget reflective of the realities associated with
policing a dynamic, diverse urban community such as Framingham
Framingham Police Department
Selectmen Presentation
November 15, 2005